Two points on marriage...

[atomweaver]

Other forumites warned me that these would go without a response in the threads where they were first mentioned, and sure enough they were correct. I'll try again with a fresh thread, then...

For those here who have argued that marriage is primarily for procreation/children, please reply;

1. Why does marriage not end when said children are raised to adulthood?
2. If children are the main point of a marriage, why isn't this mentioned in marriage vows?

"I, [state your name] take you [name of S-O] to be my lawfullywedded husband/wife. To have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part."



It sure looks to me like the primary point of a marriage is the commitment of one person to another. Children, while common (and wonderful!), are secondary to the commitment...

 

[Axioma]

I had a thread in which I argued that people who get married but don't have children should be forcibly divorced, since they're destroying the traditional meaning of marriage.

 

[LoisGriffin]

You are totally correct.

Those who get married just to have children are missing out on what marriage is really about.

 

[Washington]

You are totally correct.

Those who get married just to have children are missing out on what marriage is really about.

The ability to engage in sexual congress without being sent to hell?

 

[LoisGriffin]

Yep its a new idea but I believe it will catch on.

 

[shinbits]

I got married for the home-cooked meals.

 

[Supernaut]

I agree with the original post. Anything else is UNbiblical and UNscriptural.

 

[70x7]

My laundry kept piling up for years and years until I finally decided to get married so someone could wash them.

jk

 

[chingchang]

Other forumites warned me that these would go without a response in the threads where they were first mentioned, and sure enough they were correct. I'll try again with a fresh thread, then...

For those here who have argued that marriage is primarily for procreation/children, please reply;

1. Why does marriage not end when said children are raised to adulthood?
2. If children are the main point of a marriage, why isn't this mentioned in marriage vows?

"I, [state your name] take you [name of S-O] to be my lawfullywedded husband/wife. To have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part."



It sure looks to me like the primary point of a marriage is the commitment of one person to another. Children, while common (and wonderful!), are secondary to the commitment...

You raise good points. IMHO...only the naive (sp?) and temporarily insane would agree to those vows. How many married-folk think "if I only knew then what I know now..."? Other than the financial perks and for providing a stable environment for raising children...why would anyone want to get married? In our society...women are not the property of the man like back-in-the day. If necessary...I'd be in favor of a contract that comes up for renewal each year. If you have a partner that isn't putting forth effort...you simply decline to renew. Thoughts?

CC

 

[ebia]

It sure looks to me like the primary point of a marriage is the commitment of one person to another. Children, while common (and wonderful!), are secondary to the commitment...

That's certainly in agreement with Genesis 2.

 

[Verv]

Other forumites warned me that these would go without a response in the threads where they were first mentioned, and sure enough they were correct. I'll try again with a fresh thread, then...

For those here who have argued that marriage is primarily for procreation/children, please reply;

1. Why does marriage not end when said children are raised to adulthood?
2. If children are the main point of a marriage, why isn't this mentioned in marriage vows?

"I, [state your name] take you [name of S-O] to be my lawfullywedded husband/wife. To have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part."



It sure looks to me like the primary point of a marriage is the commitment of one person to another. Children, while common (and wonderful!), are secondary to the commitment...

Actually, the purpose of a Christian marriage is the avoidance of sin.

Paul makes it quite clear in 1 Corinthians 7:1 Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me:
It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. 3 Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment. 7 For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; 9 but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
---

children, of course, are a loving byproduct of the marriage.We are to, of course, be fruitful and multiply.

Homosexuality is a sin and an unnatural union. Heterosexual marriage is not just for a sense of procreation but more than that it is for us to not burn with passion and to be able to walk righteously in God's way by not giving ourselves over to sexual immorality.

I hope that helped answer your question.

 

[Verv]

As a sidenote:

Romantic love is a myth and does not exist and people who base their marriage on a concept of romantic love often see divorce.

You cannot simply think of your marriage as being solely about this odd, incorrect concept of marriage.

 

[brightmorningstar]

I point you all to the other threads. Marriage is the result of having two sexes, male and female, so its a sexual union as opposed to a friendship.
As a same sex couple cant reproduce anyone supporting same sex couples have no business asking whether a marriage can be consumated.

 

[David Brider]

As a sidenote:

Romantic love is a myth and does not exist...

The fact that you've never experienced it doesn't make it a myth.

...and people who base their marriage on a concept of romantic love often see divorce.

You cannot simply think of your marriage as being solely about this odd, incorrect concept of marriage.

Basing a marriage solely on romantic love would, I agree, potentially endanger. But romantic love is a part of it, one of the ingredients in bringing two people together and getting them to the point of marriage.

David.

 

[atomweaver]

I point you all to the other threads. Marriage is the result of having two sexes, male and female, so its a sexual union as opposed to a friendship.

Your response is non-responsive, it is just re-stating your original assertion, with a little verbiage twist away from it being about raising children. Tell me then, if this is the real reason for marriagewhy is this not a part of marriage vows?

Further, if marriage is about children, why does marriage continue past raising children to adulthood?

 

[brightmorningstar]

To atomweaver,

Your response is non-responsive, it is just re-stating your original assertion, with a little verbiage twist away from it being about raising children.

It should be as it’s the fact.
What is your problem with it? If marriage is not the result of having two sexes, why have two sexes male and female? In what way it is different from a best friendship otherwise?

Tell me then, if this is the real reason for marriagewhy is this not a part of marriage vows?

Further, if marriage is about children, why does marriage continue past raising children to adulthood?

Why should it, what has that got to do with the fact that same sex partnerships cant even raise children. That’s like saying even though I am not a woman I am going to demand that a woman does all that a man can before I can accept they are a woman.

 

[atomweaver]

As a sidenote:

Romantic love is a myth and does not exist and people who base their marriage on a concept of romantic love often see divorce.

Heh. While it is true that romantic love, alone, cannot sustain a marriage (there needs to be a conscious commitment to the relationship on both person's part, mutual respect, friendship, etc, etc), a marriage without romance isn't going to last either.

You cannot simply think of your marriage as being solely about this odd, incorrect concept of marriage.

This bold portion is true, but that doesn't make romance a myth; it makes it one necessary relationship element among many found in a healthy marriage.

 

[Psudopod]

Romantic love is a myth and does not exist

I hope you find the person who changes your opinion on this. Romantic love is a wonderful feeling.

 

[atomweaver]

To atomweaver,
It should be as it’s the fact.

It is an unevidenced assertion, no matter how much you pretend otherwise..

What is your problem with it?

Were your assertion to be true, one would expect that it would show up somewhere in the promises that couples make to one another; their marriage vows. It does not. Children aren't mentioned during wedding ceremonies, which are wholly about witnessing the commitment of two people to each other, therefore children aren't the point of marriages.

If marriage is not the result of having two sexes, why have two sexes male and female?

Marriage is part of the formalizing of rights of property inheritance. Property and gender have little to do with one another.

In what way it is different from a best friendship otherwise?

Your best friend is not automatically in line to inherit your house when you die.

Further, if marriage is about children, why does marriage continue past raising children to adulthood?

Why should it, what has that got to do with the fact that same sex partnerships cant even raise children.

I wasn't talking about same sex partnerships. I'm talking about marriage. The notion that marriage is primarily about raising children is irrational, in light of the fact that the majority of the time within the marriage of two adults that live full lives is completely without children...
If marriage were about raising children, it makes no sense that marriage would continue past the raising of the children to adulthood; if raising children is the point, then the marriage commitment is rendered irrelevant once the children are raised. And yet, the marriage continues. Your assertions don't fit with the stark reality of Christian marriage; it is a lifetime commitment. Raising children isn't.

 

[lawtonfogle]

As a sidenote:

Romantic love is a myth and does not exist and people who base their marriage on a concept of romantic love often see divorce.

You cannot simply think of your marriage as being solely about this odd, incorrect concept of marriage.

It does exist, but it is not the all powerful force it is made out to be, and thus basing marriages solely on it is a horrible idea.